Drugs Charities and London Mayor criticise closure of nightclub linked to drugs deaths

[NNChangeAgain]

Islington Council has revoked the license of nightclub "Fabric" after the deaths of two clubbers as a result of MDMA triggered a licensing review.

The review found security was inadequate and staff were failing to intervene. Undercover officers witnessed drugs being openly sold in the venue, and problems identified in a review 2 years ago had not been addressed.

Charities and Sadiq Khan says the closure puts the future of London nightlife at risk, and several drugs charities have said that closing clubs put drug users at risk as they will use drugs in less regulated environments.

My immeidate reaction was in support of the Council closure, but on consideration, maybe the Mayor and charities have got a point? If drug taking is an inevitable part of clubbing and nightlife, then should clubs be providing support to drug users, rather than exluding them?

The "war on drugs" has been going on since 1972 - so longer than

WW1
WW2
Korea
Vietnam
Spanish Civil War
Bosnia
Iraq (1&2)
Afghanistan

put together

for starters.

If you can tell me what the 44 years and uncountable billions have achieved, you'll have your answer.

The only people who are afraid of drug legalisation/decriminalisation are the drug dealers themselves. Which is why they are spending an awful lot of their money on making sure it never happens.

Seems everything is going to plan them.

In the last 10-15 years all the London clubs (I'm talking about the proper clubs and not exclusive/wanky ones) have closed down. There's only Ministry of Sound left, and I agree that will have an impact on nightlife in the city. These venues do attract people from other parts of the UK and abroad.

Drugs have become stronger recently. It's when people don't know what they're taking that the problems occur.

People keep dying at festivals too. Are we going to end up with no festivals?

fucking ridiculous to close it over this. The biggest killer of all drugs is alcohol and noones trying to ban that. We put in harm reduction techniques and regulate it.

People keep dying at festivals too.

It's a good point - are the Festivals where people die subject to the same Licensing reviews as nightclubs? I don't know.

Yes, festivals have to apply for licences and permissions etc and can have them revoked if the authorities have concerns.

The biggest killer of all drugs is alcohol and noones trying to ban that.

They are, it's just you don't hear about it, and the likes of the Daily Mail will ensure you never will.

Anyway, forget alcohol, how about tobacco ?

People keep dying at festivals too. Are we going to end up with no festivals?

And people keep dying not at festivals. Are we going to ban that too ?

In fact - and I may have to check my facts on this - more people die outside festivals than inside. So I would really like to see a public education drive to get us all into festivals.

Of course I may have my reading of the figures and statistics a little wrong ... not sure where I picked up that habit ?

2 deaths from MDMA in how many years?

And yet it's perfectly legal to sell cigarettes in multiple places down every street, years after the link to lung cancer was proven.

barksdale - there were 4 deaths two years ago at the same club, too.

In that time, no-one has shortened their live expectancy in the club through smoking - it's banned.

If MDMA was legalised, I'm guessing there would still be places that it wouldn't be legal to use it......

In fact - and I may have to check my facts on this - more people die outside festivals than inside. So I would really like to see a public education drive to get us all into festivals.

That reminds me of a face-palm moment a few years ago when a police chief mansplained to the media that it was safer to go out on a Friday night than stay at home because there were more assaults in the home than on the streets of his "patch" !

And yet it's perfectly legal to sell cigarettes in multiple places down every street, years after the link to lung cancer was proven.

The link was proven before the "war on drugs (tm)" started. Go figure.

To some, agitating about drugs laws may seem a frippery, compared to Brexit, Syria, etc. However, the reality is that the sheer hypocrisy involved in banning cannabis and taxing alcohol has not been lost on generations of citizens, and played a part in a slightly leery attitude to law and order where people are able to pick and choose - and justify those choices by the actions of government. Hardly conducive to a well ordered society.

Did anyone notice that alcohol, tobacco and caffeine had to be specifically excluded from the recent legislation ?

Can anyone guess why ? Yes, because alcohol, tobacco and caffeine are all psychoactive substances - and quite easily poisonous - I could certainly kill someone with the nicotine in a pack of cigarettes.

That reminds me of a face-palm moment a few years ago when a police chief mansplained to the media that it was safer to go out on a Friday night than stay at home because there were more assaults in the home than on the streets of his "patch" !

Would it have been any different if it had been a female officer ?

Police talking bollocks is an gender neutral sport, IMHO.

Lurking husband I agree 100%.
My son has just died from an accidental overdose He probably didn't know exactly what he was taking.

If you believe that drugs should be criminalised then you should be campaigning for prohibition and criminalisation of tobacco and alcohol.

If drugs became a health issue, not a criminal issue, I truly believe that gang warfare, knife and gun crime, petty theft and burglary would plummet.

Deaths from lethal fake and unregulated drugs would massively decline.

All the millions wasted on the so called war on drugs could be ploughed into quality control, education and rehab.

BUT - too many people have a vested interest in keeping the status quo.
Take a walk around the most expensive area in your town. Have a look at the cars parked outside. At least some of those properties are owned by the dealers who pay huge amounts of money to lawyers, and property developers and officials. The police can do nothing about it.

Just as there is no real incentive to stop wars because the arms dealers and corrupt governments are making too much money out of them,
keeping the so called war on drugs going is just a distraction.

Education and support is working extremely well as far as tobacco is concerned - it just takes a bit of time and investment.

endofthelinefinally

If you believe that drugs should be criminalised then you should be campaigning for prohibition and criminalisation of tobacco and alcohol.

If you really start to ask "who benefits" from drugs being illegal, there is only one conclusion. The current drug cartels - who have billions at there disposal - are investing an awful lot into keeping drugs illegal.

Every time you see the next Home Office shill trotting out the tired old mantras, just remember they are continuing Pablo Escobars work.

Once again for your loss.

There were deaths at T in the Park this summer and plenty of comment on social media that it's had its time.

They should shut the Dorchester too then!

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/12027307/Wealthy-Arab-found-dead-after-Dorchester-hotel-cocaine-binge.html

Fabric is on a very sought after piece of land. The closure has nothing to do with drug deaths and everything to do with the social cleansing and gentrification of London. It's wrong on so many levels.

You are quite right Quiero. Nothing to do with the deaths. As corrupt as...

www.islingtongazette.co.uk/news/politics/islington_council_is_sitting_on_37m_of_unspent_donations_from_developers_1_4679753?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=Social_Icon&utm_campaign=in_article_social_icons

According to my DD, Fabric was the favourite haunt of wealthy boys with 5 initials who wanted a "quiet" place for a bit of drug-taking where no-one would tell anyone else and school wouldn't find out. It was kept in the Fabric "family" in effect. No point in closing it because taking drugs won't be affected at all. Might as well close all the city banks, law firms and city trading offices too.

Section 106 payments are a good thing for communities, as long as the money is spent. It is not corrupt and it is a legal sum paid by developers to provide surgeries, community centres, parks, schools, roads, pavements etc. where there are new housing developments. The sort of things that Brexit people complained they could not access. It is not a corrupt backhander! Islington's scandal is that it hasn't spent the money! Perhaps JC should get his finger out!

If 'they' really cared about making clubbing safer, they would set up stations inside clubs where you could get whatever it is you've bought tested to check its strength and what it's cut with. I think this was actually trialled at ministry of sound.

That would help stop people overdosing. Not having sniffer dogs at doors, which scare people into taking everything they've got before they've even got in the club. That was Islington council's last bright idea.

I'm sad fabric has gone. Nowhere left like it in my opinion.

Fabric is a scapegoat. As if there is more of a problem with illegal drugs in places like Fabric, as compared with anywhere else.

Very glad that my years in London coincided with the heyday of all the great clubs.

What's the situation in other cities - I have no idea which nights/clubs are even still going.

Fabric is on a very sought after piece of land. The closure has nothing to do with drug deaths and everything to do with the social cleansing and gentrification of London. It's wrong on so many levels.

This. If the problem really was the easy availibilty of drugs taking or drug taking they may as well close down most pubs, clubs, fancy hotels festivals etc on the planet.

It's a farce.

It's a joke. People won't stop taking drugs because one club closed.

If every single club closes, there will be a lot of house parties every weekend.

Which is kind of how the club scene started in the first place!